Because we actually THINK about the long-term consequences of Obama’s Socialized everything.

If Obama wants to turn us into a European Ghetto, I hope he fails too.

You KLOWNS criticized Bush for his lack of fiscal constraint and running the printing press too fast. Obama is running the printing press more than twice as fast as Bush. Where is your outrage KLOWNS??

Oh yeah, pot-smoking daily numbs your cogent thought process.

Hey Puddy…what do you think? Do you hate America cuz you don’t agree with Obama’s Socialistic agenda??

Conservatives hate America because America, at its best, stands for certain principles and values that are anathema to conservatives–freedom of conscience, equal opportunity, representative democracy, human rights.

Because we actually THINK about the long-term consequences of Obama’s Socialized everything.

If Obama wants to turn us into a European Ghetto, I hope he fails too.

You KLOWNS criticized Bush for his lack of fiscal constraint and running the printing press too fast. Obama is running the printing press more than twice as fast as Bush. Where is your outrage KLOWNS??

Oh yeah, pot-smoking daily numbs your cogent thought process.

Hey Puddy…what do you think? Do you hate America cuz you don’t agree with Obama’s Socialistic agenda??

You KLOWNS are so predictable…it’s gotta be the pot.

02/27/2009 at 2:00 pm

the stupid fucking dipstick aka “the cyniklown” has a tough time differentiating between the profligate spending the dumbass administration engaged in e.g. an unneccesary, ill-concieved and incompetently prosecuted war of choice in Iraq and irresponsible tax cuts awarded to greedy bastards that didn’t need ’em anyway and crucial funding of infrastructure and social services.

Then he calls on another member of the “HA mensa rejects” to back him up.

Precious.

So with the dow at 7062 the cyniklown ain’t toutin’ his pikkin’ prowess so much huh…

Wishing for Obama to fail given the current disastrous straits in which we find ourselves is akin to wishing for the nation to fail. Essentially, DeLay, Limbaugh, Cynical, Puddy, and such ilk want our nation to become like Somalia, with warring bands fighting over turf. If that’s patriotism, then I’ll be starting for the Mariners come April.

The leadership of modern-day “conservatism”–the well-heeled, blue-blooded, silver-spoon, Ivy-league frat-boy occupants of corporate Mahogony Row–detest anything and everything they can’t control, exploit and squeeze for every last dime of short-term profit. Therefore, when “their” people were running gigantic deficits and funnelling the cash into beltway-bandit arms and “service” companies (Halliburton, Blackwater and their ilk) or into the black hole that the financial industry has become–that was perfectly fine and dandy. Now, when we have a new regime that wish to spend money repairing the damage of their 30 years of institutionalized larceny and improve the lot of–well, “common people”–oh, the horror!!!!!!

As to their lingering rabble of supporters, including the trolls who continue to post nonsense here and elsewhere….they’re either incredibly stupid, totally insane, or both.

Here are just SOME of the reasons the right wing cowards hate America…

1. They’re cowards. It takes guts to believe in America and the right is devoid of anyone with actual courage. 2. They’re full of hate. America just bitch-slapped these ass-happy clowns. America rejected them and their silly ideas. They’re angry and full of hate. 3. They have extremely low self-esteem. They all were spawned by inbred idiots and they hate their lives. Their low self-esteem expresses itself in hate. 4. They are plain old useless and stupid. The GOP has no real plan. They have no core values. They live by double-standards. They don’t really believe in anything so hate is all they have. 5. They’re all secret closet homosexuals full of self-loathing because they don’t have the courage to come out.

@6: the idea of a moron like cynical calling anyone else a clown…well, I take that as a compliment coming from the source it does.

Cynical has no concept of history, judgement or critical evaluation of facts. The facts are that Bush (and Reagan) set record budget deficits. Bush did not even account for allthe money spent in Iraq and Afghanistan. Bush supported the bank bailout. Paulson wrote the bill they pushed through congress. Bush has caused the worst economy since Hoover.

Those “inconvenient” facts soemhow elude the idiot cynical as Obama tries to clean up the Bush mess and fix the broken Bush economy.

It is amazing that someone could either be so stupid or so blithfully ignorant of the facts as cynical….

7. Conservatives hate America because America, at its best, stands for certain principles and values that are anathema to conservatives–freedom of conscience, equal opportunity, representative democracy, human rights.

You have your parties scrambled dude. We don’t call for the end of capitalism.

Crusader@28, what do you expect from another leadless douchy (headless lucy) sock puppet? He is extreme hatred extraordinaire 24×7. If you are new here you can visit 9/09/05 and see his brand of extremism.

28. headless lucy spews: You know, while all this other stuff is going on, those bastards at uSP are scheming night and day to politically control this state from top to bottom. Don’t drop the ball just because it is finally apparent even to the densest person that Bush is incompetent. They’re not interested in competence, the Republicans. They’re interested in raping this country as quickly and efficiently as possible. They have the Federal Government. Don’t give them the states!!!

09/09/2005 AT 8:53 PM

29. headless lucy spews: re 2: If I could choke the life out of you , I gladly would!

Greed. Gluttony. Bigotry. Materialism. Hypocrisy. Envy, of anyone having anything they don’t. Deception for its own sake. Blood lust. Seeking to make suffer those who they’ve determined to be “below” them.

the piddybiotch FORGETS…and I sure don’t know how that happens with his POWERFUL SOOPER DOOPER MASTER MIND BRAIN and all (just ask the cyniklown…HE’S all sprung on the puddybiotch’s supposed mental acuity)…that it was georgie porgie and st.ronnie and daddy ghwb that fucked all this up and tanked the markets.

We Dems get to clean up your messes AGAIN.

I was gonna say “what a bunch of baboons” but THAT would be insulting to the primates.

@40 What has Obama done to my country in a short period of time? Let’s see … he has restored rationality to our government. That, by itself, is enormous. He’s given the middle class a tax cut. He’s giving workers a fair shake. Kids will get health care. The unemployed will get unemployment insurance benefits. The hungry will get food stamps. Should I continue? I’d waaaaaay rather have him sitting in that chair than John “I don’t know anything about economics” McCain.

Sorta like someone who references reports they never read because, as it turns out, the reports never existed, Don Joe? Sorta like that?

Good grief, you’re still trying to kick that dead horse? Incredible.

For the record, I cited wikipedia (i.e. that’s the source I gave when asked for a source). Wikipedia quoted the CBO, but didn’t give a citation.

Secondly, I did, in fact, provide a link to a more recent CBO report than the one that Wikipedia claimed to have referenced. You even read it.

Third, I have never attempted to hide the mistakes I made. This, however, apparently doesn’t matter to you. I don’t know why.

Lastly, I have repeatedly asked you and the other nattering nabobs of negativity around here to explain exactly how any of this affects my argument. Unless you show how these admitted errors affect my argument, you’re attack on me is nothing more than plain old ad-hominem.

Now, if you’re really interested in discussing my argument, I’m more than happy to restate it for you. If you’re not at all interested in discussing my actual argument, then I’d suggest you spend a little more time contemplating the true meaning of the concept of “intellectual honesty”.

While we’re on the subject, we have intellectual honesty Bobby Jindal style:

Louisiana’s transportation department plans to request federal dollars for a New Orleans to Baton Rouge passenger rail service from the same pot of railroad money in the president’s economic stimulus package that Gov. Bobby Jindal criticized as unnecessary pork on national television Tuesday night.

Republicans do indeed hate America. The Federalists faded into history, so did the Whigs. The Republicans are the next political party to die. I will not cry at the wake, though I do believe that a healthy democracy requires both a majority view and a noble opposition. Sadly, the GOP cannot even supply the noble opposition. All that party has is Rush Limbaugh and Tom DeLay. The noble opposition lies within the Democratic Party. The Republicans have become entirely irrelevant, though the volume of those who are left rises.

@44 I did, in fact, provide a link to a more recent CBO report than the one that Wikipedia claimed to have referenced.

—————-

Yea, Clueless Joe, you FINALLY produced A doc:

[http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/42xx/doc4218/s1054.pdf]

that had data that didn’t even REMOTELY resemble anything you had originally claimed:

“So, where did the hedge funds and institutional investors get their money? Any ideas? As a clue, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the Bush tax cuts would increase the Federal deficit by $60 billion in 2003 and by $340 billion by 2004–right about the time when the whole cycle I cited above started kicking in.”

Have you no shame for this con job?

It’s also a version you produced – after MUCH nudging – out of desperation when you FINALLY realized you couldn’t find a CBO doc that supported your claim above. In other words, you had never bothered to check out your own CLUE by locating and reading the document you were citing. I mean, not checking your sources – especially when you were talking up the BIG clue you were providing – seems a little dumb, don’t ya think?

And just a reminder, when you were pressed on the OBVIOUS discrepancy between your data above and the CBO doc you FINALLY produced, you pleaded:

“I don’t recall saying that my source for that statement was the CBO”

[NOTE TO READERS: ignore Clueless Joe’s statement #1 above]

placing you in the very best of company:

“I am not a crook” Richard Nixon

“I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.” Bill Clinton

You’re instructing your readers to ignore relevant facts. How do you define “intellectual honesty,” Jane? I’d really like to know.

[The CBO estimate I provided] had data that didn’t even REMOTELY resemble anything you had originally claimed

As I’ve pointed out before, and which you have never addressed, we’re talking about estimates. Estimates vary, sometimes widely. Indeed, as you’ll recall, I found an entirely different set of estimates that were developed by a very different process than that used by the CBO, and they varied even more than the discrepancy with which you seem so vary occupied.

You’re assuming that some kind of diligent research was necessary for the sake of my argument, but that’s not at all obvious until such time as you can connect all of this up with the argument I made.

I don’t know. Perhaps you’re content with some kind of hollow victory about having impugned my credibility, as if my credibility has any bearing whatsoever on the argument itself.

If that’s the case, be my guest. Since my argument doesn’t hinge on my credibility, your insistence on attacking my credibility while refusing to address my argument means that I’ve actually won the argument.

@50 Perhaps you’re content with some kind of hollow victory about having impugned my credibility

——————–

No, Joe, it ain’t so! YOU impugned your credibility, no one else. In fact, it’s the ONLY THING you seem skilled at! Again:

1. As a BIG “clue” for someone, you cited a document that, as it turns out, you had never even read:

“So, where did the hedge funds and institutional investors get their money? Any ideas? As a clue, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the Bush tax cuts would increase the Federal deficit by $60 billion in 2003 and by $340 billion by 2004–right about the time when the whole cycle I cited above started kicking in.”

In fact, you still can’t turn up the doc behind these numbers . . . we’re STILL waiting for it!

2. Then you tried to pass off another CBO doc when pressed for the supporting evidence, and it had numbers no where even close to what you were claiming (are you REALLY that dumb?)

3. Then when that “discrepancy” was pointed out you claimed:

“I don’t recall saying that my source for that statement was the CBO”

Too much . . . you not only DON’T read what you cite, but you DON’T read what you write!

4. Finally, AFTER ALL THIS, you retreated YET AGAIN and claimed the data is really all over the place anyway:

“Estimates vary, sometimes widely”

Of course, when you were GRACIOUSLY handing out your big CLUE to everyone you weren’t saying this. In fact, when you were handing out your big CLUE, Clueless Joe, you hadn’t read a SINGLE CBO document at all! Now that’s due diligence!!!

Your spin and blather is all being woven step-by-desperate step BACKWARDS as you try to cover your dishonest butt, Clueless Joe.

Ya have no credibility, got it? Anyone would be nuts to believe you at this point.

YOU did yourself in, and it’s time to man up. You want SOME redemption? Mount an expedition to locate and return the “lost” CBO document. Where should we begin? How about here: the “Lost World” – otherwise what is known as your brain.

Ya know, Joe, SOMEHOW it just makes PLENTY of sense that you’re a Microsoft “software engineer”:

Cyber Security Community Joins Forces to Defeat Conficker Worm Estimates of how many systems infected by Conficker, a contagion that has exploited Microsoft Windows PCs over the past few months, vary widely, from 2 million to more than 10 million machines.

Why, on earth, are you continuing to hammer, over and over again, a point of fact that I have long ago conceded? It’s truly amazing how you just can’t seem to get yourself over this.

Now, given that I have already conceded my errors, please try to explain how those errors affect my argument. If I completely lack any form of credibility, as you claim, then dispensing with my argument ought to be trivial.

But you don’t even try. Kick the horse again, Jane. I’ve still won the argument.

I suppose it’s worth pointing out that Jane has a habit of continuously quoting my comment here, but manages to avoid the continuing conversation here and here.

Note the sequence of events. I first attributed an estimate to the CBO. Someone asked me for a source, at which point I rather clearly cited wikipedia as my source. But Jane, the stickler for “intellectual honesty,” doesn’t bother to tell the whole story.

Now, did I accurately copy down the numbers from wikipedia? Nope. An error I copped to a long time ago. Amazing revelation #1. Don Joe is human. Imagine that.

Did I bother to go and find the original document? Nope. On the other hand, it’s not at all clear that it was necessary. These are estimates, and, as I have since pointed out, there are other estimates that show the CBO’s estimates to have been on the light side.

But, and this is the truly curious thing, Jane, who can’t be bothered to present all the facts about my exchange with John, thinks I should have gone and done some kind of exhaustive search for the document that wikipedia referenced and that I’m some kind of blundering idiot for not having done so.

Jane gives no justification for her persistent attempts to hold me to a factual standard that she refused to uphold herself. Which is why I’ve asked her to tell me what she thinks “intellectual honesty” really is. Clearly, she’s operating under a definition of the term that deviates from common usage. I’m guessing it’s a variation on OKIYAR. Perhaps it’s OKIYAJ?

(1) $350 should be $340 (thanks to an alert reader for pointing that out!) (2) $340 was for tax year 2008 (thanks to an alert reader for pointing that out!) (3) I haven’t been able to find the CBO source for the 59% or $340 billion (thanks to an alert reader for informing me that that’s part of the “analysis”!) (4) The CBO document I was eventually able to produce doesn’t support my claim (thanks to an alert reader for pointing that out!) (5) I never said I referenced a CBO source (thanks to an alert reader for pointing out that I was mistaken!) (6) Numbers don’t really matter because the three, no four, no five, no six documents I checked don’t agree anyway (7) You can’t disprove my “analysis” (because I’ve done everything humanly possible to cover my convoluted blather with even more convoluted blather!) (8) I have no idea what I’m talking about (but I can’t admit that because my bruised ego is too big to fail!)

Nice. The last time you said something about me, you couldn’t be bothered to quote my sentences in full. Now, you aren’t even bothering to quote what I’ve actually said.

The irony is almost delicious. You accuse me of being careless with the facts, yet, for some reason, you find it necessary to put words in my mouth. How do you expect anyone to take you seriously?

With a fervor and fanaticism bordering on the religious, you have pursued this dogged attempt to impugn my credibility, but have only succeeded in damaging your own. The irony would be sweetly delicious were the outcome not so horribly pathetic.

Don Joe, HA’s resident Rodney Dangerfield of economic “analysis.”

I don’t recall ever demanding respect from anyone, and I certainly don’t expect it from people who are as cavalier about the truth as you are.

Actually, I should probably be flattered by all the attention I’m getting from these gnats. Apparently they think I’m a rather big fish in the HA pond. Amazing, but they can’t even get that right.

By the way, ejn, since we’re on the general subject of intellectual honesty, I’ll extend the question I asked Jane in my comment at 59 to you:

They’re the same people who believed that Bill Clinton’s use of the FISA court to obtain warrants to eavesdrop on Americans was a grave threat to liberty, but believed that George Bush’s warrantless eavesdropping on Americans in violation of the law was a profound defense of freedom. In sum, they dressed up in warrior clothing to fight against Bill Clinton’s supposed tyranny, and then underwent a major costume change on January 20, 2001, thereafter dressing up in cheerleader costumes to glorify George Bush’s far more extreme acquisitions of federal power. [emphasis in the original]

Does that reflect your idea of “intellectual honesty”?

Why do people who have absolutely no credibility whatsoever think that they can have anything legitimate to say about the credibility of someone else?

Please Donate

I appreciate feeling appreciated. Also, money.

Currency:

Amount:

Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?

Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!

Search HA

Follow Goldy

HA Commenting Policy

It may be hard to believe from the vile nature of the threads, but yes, we have a commenting policy. Comments containing libel, copyright violations, spam, blatant sock puppetry, and deliberate off-topic trolling are all strictly prohibited, and may be deleted on an entirely arbitrary, sporadic, and selective basis. And repeat offenders may be banned! This is my blog. Life isn’t fair.